comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: GUI Builder limited / Obj-oriented IDL
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: GUI Builder limited / Obj-oriented IDL [message #13458] Wed, 11 November 1998 00:00
mirko_vukovic is currently offline  mirko_vukovic
Messages: 50
Registered: January 1998
Member
In article <36495284.CCE128AE@astro.estec.esa.nl>,
mwerger@astro.estec.esa.nl wrote:

> If IDL continues its OO way (and I completely support this decision)
> they should really think about getting support by 'Rational Rose' (RR),
> which is a oo-development 'tool'. This would increase its acceptance
> by people which even have not even thought to use IDL (and if this
> people can afford RR, they also can afford IDL)

argh,
yet another 1500$ or so. But I do like the methodology.

mirko

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Re: GUI Builder limited / Obj-oriented IDL [message #13473 is a reply to message #13458] Wed, 11 November 1998 00:00 Go to previous message
Michael Werger is currently offline  Michael Werger
Messages: 34
Registered: May 1997
Member
David Fanning wrote:
>
> ... [snipped because my mailer wants more added than
> included text]
>
> Granted, I didn't read anything about it. I just figured
> it would be sort of easy to use. But I found it confusing,
> and I found that I was futzing around with it so much that
> I wasn't getting anything done. (This in itself is not
> that unusual, to be fair.)
>
> I'll probably give it another try later, but I'm
> pretty sure the code it generates will not help
> novices write better widget programs. Faster? Maybe,
> if they can learn to use it. Easier to maintain? Not
> likely. But, hey, the more people are confused,
> the better my accountant and I like it. :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> David

I wonder even if a widget builder is the right approach. If one
can program some advanced stuff in IDL, she/he is very likely able
to create a proper widget interface to the program.
From my point of view, widget programming is not hard but only
writing some lines of code more than you may have wished. But
do it yourself (and not with a GUI builder) ensures that the
code can be maintained afterwards.

What I really suggest is to have a look at all the CW_*
(compound widgets) routines. These provide lot of things commonly
used. Maybe/Hopefully some nice CW's are added (something for
defining a region of interest, a wrapper around the trackball,
...)

Something different:
If IDL continues its OO way (and I completely support this decision)
they should really think about getting support by 'Rational Rose' (RR),
which is a oo-development 'tool'. This would increase its acceptance
by people which even have not even thought to use IDL (and if this
people can afford RR, they also can afford IDL)

Why in this context? Then it is easy to create a widget interface
and the accompanying code simply by using the GUI of RR to >define<
the program [and let RR write it then].

--
Michael Werger ------------o
ESA ESTEC & Praesepe B.V. |
Astrophysics Division mwerger@astro.estec.esa.nl|
| Postbus 299 http://astro.estec.esa.nl |
| 2200 AG Noordwijk +31 71 565 3783 (Voice)
o------------------- The Netherlands +31 71 565 4690 (FAX)
  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: Xinteranimate, getting control back
Next Topic: Access to serial ports

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 19:50:29 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00590 seconds